Construction workers, mainly foreign workers, went on strike in a site building HDB flats. The main complaint is that workers were not paid since October 2011 and employers only agreed to pay the October salary today and salary due in December by Friday. Now is February 2012 and there should be two more months salary accrued and due for payment.
These workers are already badly exploited by their agents before coming here, and are mostly in debt. And the employers and contractors should have a little decency not continue to exploit them by not paying their dues.
Regardless of all legal and contractual obligations, it is simply inhuman to exploit them this way. On moral and ethical grounds, the govt must step in immediately to end such exploitation of such workers.
It is terribly shameful for a first world country to bully illiterate and helpless workers from poor countries. Despicable is the word to describe such abuses of workers whose only purpose here is to work and earn a decent living. And they are being paid pittance, not millions.
Where is the human conscience and humanity?
2/06/2012
Ex teachers commanding $1000 a day
The reputation of our teachers and education system is so high abroad that our teachers are in demand to impart our teaching skills and methodology to other countries including the US, Philippines, Chile, Netherland and Saudi Arabia.
NIE director Lee Sing Kong said, ‘the achievements of Singaporean students have been noticed internationally. “There must be something right in the way our teachers are prepared.”’
He is right and wrong at the same time. What is the point of our students being good academically but cannot be translated to skills that are in demand in the industries? Even in Singapore, they are only good as civil servants. In the commercial world, they are at best good at middle management level. Even at that level they are being replaced by foreigners from third world countries. The CEO jobs are unlikely positions for the products of the Singapore system. I think we would be better in producing unthinking robots.
And our people have an international reputation of being daft. And that is probably the main reason why so many foreign talents are here to help them and the country to grow and progress. Maybe the Singapore education is only good at producing students with good academic results but dysfunctional at work. All plain daft, good on paper but cannot perform.
The more I think about it, the more silly the situation is. Products of the best and very expensive education system, with the best facilities, but useless to the commercial world except the public service when there is little competition from foreigners. And more shitting on the heads of daft Sinkies.
NIE director Lee Sing Kong said, ‘the achievements of Singaporean students have been noticed internationally. “There must be something right in the way our teachers are prepared.”’
He is right and wrong at the same time. What is the point of our students being good academically but cannot be translated to skills that are in demand in the industries? Even in Singapore, they are only good as civil servants. In the commercial world, they are at best good at middle management level. Even at that level they are being replaced by foreigners from third world countries. The CEO jobs are unlikely positions for the products of the Singapore system. I think we would be better in producing unthinking robots.
And our people have an international reputation of being daft. And that is probably the main reason why so many foreign talents are here to help them and the country to grow and progress. Maybe the Singapore education is only good at producing students with good academic results but dysfunctional at work. All plain daft, good on paper but cannot perform.
The more I think about it, the more silly the situation is. Products of the best and very expensive education system, with the best facilities, but useless to the commercial world except the public service when there is little competition from foreigners. And more shitting on the heads of daft Sinkies.
A great leader without ideas
Can a leader be great without ideas? Not exactly that they are dumb otherwise they would not be great leaders. They have ideas but their ideas may not work at all. They could be great being just a leader, to be able to move the masses with him through their oratory skills and leadership. Mao Tse Tung was a great leader in unifying China. His developmental and economic ideas or non ideas were simply disastrous. China was lucky that there were so many other able leaders to do the right things and chart the right course for the country. If China was to follow Mao’s economic development ideas, China would still be a poor third world country.
So was Winton Churchill. He was a leader at the right time to provide the motivation to a Britain at war. The British saw a hope through him. He rallied the people to fight the Germans. He appeared bigger than life. Once the war was over, he faded away like a pedestrian. There was no idea for the rebuilding of Britain coming from him in a way. He was there for a moment, for a purpose.
Many big personalities, including dictators, have lived through history but were bankrupt of ideas to bring a better life for country and people and eventually led to their own downfall, a breakdown of the country and law and order. The only good ideas they had were self preservation, preservation of power and wealth for their families.
The citizens, especially in a democracy, must be able to decipher the ideas of their leaders. Some leaders were fortunate to have good lieutenants to provide them the ideas to carry through. And their apparent emptiness in good ideas could have gone unnoticed or concealed for years without the people knowing. As long as the good lieutenants are around to run the show and the leaders continue to talk, motivate and lead, things can look really good, because the ideas were really good.
The lack of good lieutenants will surface eventually like seeing the rock when the tide subsided. But this takes time and sometimes it seems to be forever. The people can put in some effort to revise their history and look at the ideas that really originated from the leaders and not from their lieutenants and compare their results. Without doing a little homework, many of the good works and ideas of the lieutenants could be mistakenly seen as the ideas of the leaders that really have no good ideas. And it can be worst, some only had bad ideas, ideas that have been proven wrong time and time again.
The people must not be daft but be critical and discriminating of the ideas from their leaders. Do not be misled or misguided by leaders with no ideas or no good ideas, or only bad ideas. Only time will tell the truth.
So was Winton Churchill. He was a leader at the right time to provide the motivation to a Britain at war. The British saw a hope through him. He rallied the people to fight the Germans. He appeared bigger than life. Once the war was over, he faded away like a pedestrian. There was no idea for the rebuilding of Britain coming from him in a way. He was there for a moment, for a purpose.
Many big personalities, including dictators, have lived through history but were bankrupt of ideas to bring a better life for country and people and eventually led to their own downfall, a breakdown of the country and law and order. The only good ideas they had were self preservation, preservation of power and wealth for their families.
The citizens, especially in a democracy, must be able to decipher the ideas of their leaders. Some leaders were fortunate to have good lieutenants to provide them the ideas to carry through. And their apparent emptiness in good ideas could have gone unnoticed or concealed for years without the people knowing. As long as the good lieutenants are around to run the show and the leaders continue to talk, motivate and lead, things can look really good, because the ideas were really good.
The lack of good lieutenants will surface eventually like seeing the rock when the tide subsided. But this takes time and sometimes it seems to be forever. The people can put in some effort to revise their history and look at the ideas that really originated from the leaders and not from their lieutenants and compare their results. Without doing a little homework, many of the good works and ideas of the lieutenants could be mistakenly seen as the ideas of the leaders that really have no good ideas. And it can be worst, some only had bad ideas, ideas that have been proven wrong time and time again.
The people must not be daft but be critical and discriminating of the ideas from their leaders. Do not be misled or misguided by leaders with no ideas or no good ideas, or only bad ideas. Only time will tell the truth.
2/05/2012
Sinkies lack drive, are daft
Sinkies are daft and lack drive. Foreigners are hungry and willing to slog. Foreigners are better. These are the sweeping statements that were made by intelligent people in high offices. How real are they?
Sinkies put their children into nurseries at the young age of 3 and many studied till the age of 21, ie 18 years of formal education and spending several hundred thousands of dollars, only to become taxi drivers. That is definitely daft but not lacking drive. The nursery or kindergarten fees for the good ones which Sinkies are willing to queue overnight or involve in community work, cost a bomb. This is not drive?
And the children grew up fighting for places in the best schools to score straight As. Getting 6As and above is now quite normal. They got these grades without drive, like buying from the street vendors? Heard of private tuition from pre school? And they will continue to pursue their degrees in local and overseas universities. And they are found wanting, lacking in skill sets and experience, and are replaced by foreigners from the third world who spent lesser time in make shift huts called schools, half baked teachers and teaching system, and some probably bought their degrees from the streets. Many have questionable academic papers and work experience printed in their CVs. This is extremely daft but Sinkies got no drive?
And they worked so hard, always stayed late in the office, delayed getting married, and if married, delayed in child bearing, to concentrate in their careers only to see some foreigners walking in to be their bosses, in their own country. This not daft, but plain stupid driven.
And they saved for a life time only to see their money in monthly statements, without any right to touch them unless the authority says so. This is not daft, but silly. Their hard earned money and other people control and decide how to spend them. Yes, no drive to get it back.
And they are expected to live a life in one of the most expensive countries in the world with a couple of thousands of dollars a month as salary and think they have a life when people are complaining that anything less than $55k pm will affect the quality of their lives. And the Sinkies still think they have a damn good life, even the poor daft Sinkies are the envy of the world. Or at least that is what they were told. And the daft Sinkies believed. Yes daft indeed.
And because they lacked drive, they will have to work till they die, be it 70, 80 or 90 years old. And because they are so daft, they believe that this is the way to live their lives, to work and work and work, with money in their savings only to feel good but cannot spend. The 70 or 80 year old uncles and aunties working as cleaners in food courts lacked drive!
Sinkies are really daft, aren’t they? Got drive or not? This foolishness of branding Sinkies as daft and got no drive reflects badly on those bloopers who spoke without thinking. They are all parroting the words of god like blind believers. God is unquestionable. Bunch of unthinking idiots. No wonder they need to recruit foreigners to fill the top management positions. And with the million dollar salaries, they need to pay jokers earning less than ten per cent of what they are getting to solve their problems with kindergarten recommendations.
Sinkies put their children into nurseries at the young age of 3 and many studied till the age of 21, ie 18 years of formal education and spending several hundred thousands of dollars, only to become taxi drivers. That is definitely daft but not lacking drive. The nursery or kindergarten fees for the good ones which Sinkies are willing to queue overnight or involve in community work, cost a bomb. This is not drive?
And the children grew up fighting for places in the best schools to score straight As. Getting 6As and above is now quite normal. They got these grades without drive, like buying from the street vendors? Heard of private tuition from pre school? And they will continue to pursue their degrees in local and overseas universities. And they are found wanting, lacking in skill sets and experience, and are replaced by foreigners from the third world who spent lesser time in make shift huts called schools, half baked teachers and teaching system, and some probably bought their degrees from the streets. Many have questionable academic papers and work experience printed in their CVs. This is extremely daft but Sinkies got no drive?
And they worked so hard, always stayed late in the office, delayed getting married, and if married, delayed in child bearing, to concentrate in their careers only to see some foreigners walking in to be their bosses, in their own country. This not daft, but plain stupid driven.
And they saved for a life time only to see their money in monthly statements, without any right to touch them unless the authority says so. This is not daft, but silly. Their hard earned money and other people control and decide how to spend them. Yes, no drive to get it back.
And they are expected to live a life in one of the most expensive countries in the world with a couple of thousands of dollars a month as salary and think they have a life when people are complaining that anything less than $55k pm will affect the quality of their lives. And the Sinkies still think they have a damn good life, even the poor daft Sinkies are the envy of the world. Or at least that is what they were told. And the daft Sinkies believed. Yes daft indeed.
And because they lacked drive, they will have to work till they die, be it 70, 80 or 90 years old. And because they are so daft, they believe that this is the way to live their lives, to work and work and work, with money in their savings only to feel good but cannot spend. The 70 or 80 year old uncles and aunties working as cleaners in food courts lacked drive!
Sinkies are really daft, aren’t they? Got drive or not? This foolishness of branding Sinkies as daft and got no drive reflects badly on those bloopers who spoke without thinking. They are all parroting the words of god like blind believers. God is unquestionable. Bunch of unthinking idiots. No wonder they need to recruit foreigners to fill the top management positions. And with the million dollar salaries, they need to pay jokers earning less than ten per cent of what they are getting to solve their problems with kindergarten recommendations.
2/04/2012
Living hypocrisies
Singaporeans are all reading the life of Dr Toh Chin Chye, one of the founding father of modern Singapore and the PAP. Chua Mui Hoong has a half page article of Toh Chin Chye in the ST today describing his tenacity and fearless fight for equality, press freedom, the politicising of the young Singaporeans and advocating more space for political freedom when he became a back bencher.
In the same breath it also described the irony of Dr Toh’s image as a repressive vice chancellor of the University of Singapore and his role as an integral part of the PAP machinery of oppression against dissenting voices and political opposition.
It seems that Dr Toh would be best remembered as a tough critic of the PAP during his last term as a back bencher, and for understanding and championing the plight of the powerless. The dying years of Dr Toh must be full of regrets that he did not do more for the powerless when he could. And when he was not in a position to do much, he fought hard but in vain, as a back bencher.
The moral of the story is that when a politician is in power, he is with the establishment, heart and soul. It was not a time to really think for the oppressed and the losers. It was all might and glory and fame. It is only when one is cast away from the pinnacle of power that one starts to understand what it is like at the receiving end or at the wrong end of the stick.
Such an enlightening experience seems to be repeated every time a politician falls from grace without fail. Several have stood up openly to speak for the oppressed people and even against the bad policies and culture of the power of the day.
Must such hypocrisies be repeated over and over again? Would those still in power reflect on this and stand up for the oppressed while they are still in power, still able to do something right, to live with their conscience of righteousness? Or would we see them crawling back, regretting that they should have done this and that when they could?
Would the living hypocrisies be repeated, be recycled all over again? Would more of such ironies be rewritten in the media as each leader hits the dust? May the living hypocrisies learn from the past masters and live a life of little or lesser regrets while there is still time for them to do something before they end up in the same boat?
The experience and regrets of our founding fathers are wisdom that is not taught in the textbooks. They are living examples and lessons to be learned to make one a better man. Future generations will be less forgiving of the failings of political leaders who could have done otherwise but chose not to do so in their heydays of power and glory.
Don’t come crying and wanting to defend the weak when they should have done so when they could. A spade shall be called a spade and hypocrisies should be called hypocrisies and nothing less.
In the same breath it also described the irony of Dr Toh’s image as a repressive vice chancellor of the University of Singapore and his role as an integral part of the PAP machinery of oppression against dissenting voices and political opposition.
It seems that Dr Toh would be best remembered as a tough critic of the PAP during his last term as a back bencher, and for understanding and championing the plight of the powerless. The dying years of Dr Toh must be full of regrets that he did not do more for the powerless when he could. And when he was not in a position to do much, he fought hard but in vain, as a back bencher.
The moral of the story is that when a politician is in power, he is with the establishment, heart and soul. It was not a time to really think for the oppressed and the losers. It was all might and glory and fame. It is only when one is cast away from the pinnacle of power that one starts to understand what it is like at the receiving end or at the wrong end of the stick.
Such an enlightening experience seems to be repeated every time a politician falls from grace without fail. Several have stood up openly to speak for the oppressed people and even against the bad policies and culture of the power of the day.
Must such hypocrisies be repeated over and over again? Would those still in power reflect on this and stand up for the oppressed while they are still in power, still able to do something right, to live with their conscience of righteousness? Or would we see them crawling back, regretting that they should have done this and that when they could?
Would the living hypocrisies be repeated, be recycled all over again? Would more of such ironies be rewritten in the media as each leader hits the dust? May the living hypocrisies learn from the past masters and live a life of little or lesser regrets while there is still time for them to do something before they end up in the same boat?
The experience and regrets of our founding fathers are wisdom that is not taught in the textbooks. They are living examples and lessons to be learned to make one a better man. Future generations will be less forgiving of the failings of political leaders who could have done otherwise but chose not to do so in their heydays of power and glory.
Don’t come crying and wanting to defend the weak when they should have done so when they could. A spade shall be called a spade and hypocrisies should be called hypocrisies and nothing less.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)